Causes of the First Jewish Revolt

Author: Justin James

Written for Dr. Strong’s course REL 571: Archaeology and the New Testament, May 4, 2009, Missouri State University

Abstract: Causes of the First Jewish Revolt-This paper looks at the causes and background of the first major Jewish revolt against Rome. This war had a huge disparity in resources and manpower. It is worth looking at why it happened, especially since Judea is the best documented Roman province. I argue that three main causes that interacted over time: 1) sectarian tension between Jews and Gentiles, 2) Jewish desire for political independence, and 3) dire economic conditions in Judea. This paper consists of three parts: 1) a brief discussion of the principal literary sources, 2) a look at the Roman province of Judea, and 3) the causes of the First Jewish Revolt.

Introduction – The Jewish Revolt of 66-74 AD did not sprout from a single root. The problem is naturally complex, for many Jews understood that their small nation had no chance against the colossus of Rome. Although they were a distinct and recognizable group within the empire, the Jews were deeply divided in this period. Furthermore, the Jews were not the only actors in this tragedy. In order to understand the situation properly, we must examine the province of Judea as a whole, as well as other factors beside religion. Three main causes can be identified, which interacted over time: 1) sectarian tension between Jews and Gentiles, 2) Jewish desire for political independence, and 3) dire economic conditions in Judea. This paper consists of three parts: 1) a brief discussion of the principal literary sources, 2) a look at the Roman province of Judea, and 3) the causes of the First Jewish Revolt.

The Literary Sources – Our chief literary source is Josephus, who wrote The Jewish War and Antiquities of the Jews. In addition to Josephus, we also have the New Testament and Talmudic literature. These sources provide an unrivaled look at Roman rule from the perspective of the conquered, which no other region of the Roman Empire can compare. For so many of Rome’s wars we have only a Roman perspective, but this war is an exception. Josephus was especially suited to compose a history of the war, having fought on both sides.

Although Josephus was condemned by many of his countrymen as a quisling, a statue of him was erected in Rome, a rare honor for a member of a conquered people. Josephus was also a member of the priestly aristocracy, and claimed royal lineage.[1][2] He began as a Jewish general but later joined the Romans as a collaborator. Given his pro-Roman stance and prophecy about Vespasian, it is not surprising that Emperor Titus commissioned Josephus to write the official account of the war.[3]The Jewish War is partly propaganda, which Josephus himself states emphatically, “If I have dwelt at some length on this topic [the Greatness of Rome], my intention was not so much to extol the Romans as to console those whom they have vanquished and to deter others who may be tempted to revolt.” [4][5] Josephus was an apologist, being a member of the ruling class that cooperated with Rome most directly. Accordingly, he was extremely hostile to the rebels, who threatened not only Roman rule in Judaea, but also the class and order he belonged to. The works of Josephus are invaluable, but we should be mindful of his biases.

III. The Province of Judea – Judea was an important province due to its location in the Levant, being sandwiched between two more quiet provinces that outranked her: to the south was Egypt, the breadbasket of the empire, and to the north Syria, an important commercial hub. The port city of Caesarea Maritima served as Rome’s headquarters in the province, which Herod the Great built in order to connect Judea with the rest of the world. Despite its importance, however, Judaea was not one of Rome’s prized possessions. The province was difficult to govern, where aversion to Roman hegemony was ever present, as Goldsworthy writes, “Perhaps the most continuous resistance to Roman rule was found in Judaea, where sporadic uprisings and banditry exploded into massed rebellion in 66-74 AD and 133-5 AD.”[6] Rebellions did occur in other provinces, but normally after the Romans had just conquered them, when the benefits of Roman rule had yet to be appreciated and the ruling classes were still being absorbed. According to Stern, “…the persistence of such misunderstandings as late as the third century was more specific to Palestinian Jews…”[7]

Judea was such a troublesome province that the Romans preferred to rule it through client-kings. Nevertheless, in 6 AD the Herodian Dynasty was ousted, on the request of the Jews themselves. The rule of Herod Archelaus was so tyrannical that a joint deputation of Jews and Samaritans appealed to Emperor Augustus, who advised Archelaus to treat his subjects more kindly. The king ignored these orders and was banished to Gaul. Rome thus granted Judea’s wish, but with that action the last semblance of Jewish political independence ended. In 6 AD the province of Judea was organized, to be ruled by Roman procurators under the oversight of the governor of Syria. The Roman procurators, however, had even less success than the Herodian Dynasty in winning the hearts and minds of the Jews.[8] The chief duty of the procurators was collecting the annual tax, and in order to do that they had to maintain the peace. These officials were equestrians, not senators, and had only a small auxiliary garrison at their command.[9] The Romans gave the priestly aristocracy in Jerusalem a role in administration, particularly with the Temple, but their ability to control the general population was limited.

From a Roman standpoint, the Jews were definitely an oddity. They were the only monotheistic people they had encountered, which is not to underestimate the peculiarities of other cultures within the empire. Nevertheless, assimilating tribes in Europe or Africa was a far simpler task than what awaited Rome in Judea. We know more about the Jews than other peoples because of their literary tradition, from rabbinic Judaism and Christianity.[10] The Jews, being a literate people, they could hark back to the glorious days of Kings Saul, David, and Solomon. They had once been subjects of a kingdom both independent and vibrant. Indeed, closer to the Roman period were the Maccabees, patriots who had held the Seleucid Empire at bay. The disunited tribes of Europe and Africa were a different matter, as they had neither a recorded history nor any concept of national unity. These peoples had nothing akin to the Covenant in the Torah, which provided the Jews with a basis for nationhood. Furthermore, the unique monotheistic faith of the Jews, and the rites conducted in the Temple in Jerusalem, continually reinforced the Jewish national identity.[11] When not in revolt, the Jews flourished under Roman rule, but at the same time they refused to fully identify with Roman society.[12] We can accredit that accomplishment as much to Rome as the Jews, with regard to the former’s hands-off policy.

Judaism did offset its people from the rest of the polytheistic Roman world. The monotheism of the Jews was not necessarily “incompatible with the polytheism of the Roman state religion,” since the Jews were tolerated by the Romans, but it did lead to tension.[13] The Greeks, Egyptians, and Phoenicians had advanced cultures and proud histories like the Jews, but they found it possible to function in a world dominated by Rome. The Jews did not. Judaism emphasized differences and made it difficult for Jews to tolerate foreign rule, for the Torah clearly laid out their relationship with their god. This relationship “would be manifested in the secular success of their state over its enemies.”[14] Moreover, there was the prospect of “The Anointed One,” a messiah that would lead the Jews to freedom. The Jewish aristocracy was unable to be fully absorbed into the social system of the empire, not in the same way in other provinces, because of their religious taboos.[15] Nevertheless, we should not view Judaism in this period monolithically, as there was internal discord among the Jews, especially between the Sadducees and Pharisees.[16]

Now that we have discussed the province and its inhabitants, how did the Romans meet the challenge? They met it with characteristic Roman practicality, as Maukay asserts: “…the governors on the whole attempted to accommodate local religious sensibilities, especially concerning Jerusalem and its great Temple…”[17] The Romans allowed the Jews to practice their faith, which was in accordance with their policy of religious tolerance; there are plenty of references in Josephus to Rome’s special treatment of the Jews.[18] This was unlike the Jews for instance, who followed a usual policy of forcible conversion, e.g. Idumea, the fatherland of Herod the Great. For example, the imperial cult was pervasive across the Mediterranean Basin, which required Roman subjects to pay their respects to the emperors. In function, the imperial cult provided a means to unify disparate peoples of a massive and diverse empire.[19] The situation was different in Judea, but to Rome’s credit she met the locals half way. Reed grants that Rome allowed “prayers for Caesar” to substitute for “sacrifices to Caesar.”[20] The Romans were clearly not anti-Semitic, but while the Romans would tolerate Jewish religious practices, repeated acts of insubordination would not be.[21] Thus, we must be mindful that Rome’s special attention to the Jews, and by extension the Christians, was politically motivated but not ideologically motivated.[22]

Although the Romans tolerated the Jews they did not understand them, nor did they attempt to. Roman society was remarkably open for its time, but newly conquered peoples, who were not yet Romanized, were perceived with a degree of prejudice. Tacitus of the early empire wrote briefly about the Jews, whose writings may reveal some common stereotypes that surfaced out of the First Jewish Revolt; for example, his conclusion that “Jewish religion is tasteless and mean.”[23] Indeed, the Romans believed that the Jews were unreasonably stubborn, almost atheistic, since they denied the existence of any deities except their own. To the Romans, Judea was just a dusty corner of the empire, and one that was always causing headaches for the Emperor. Not surprisingly, the procurators sometimes lost their patience with the Jews and rode roughshod over their sensibilities. Maukay writes, “Since Jewish opinion was in many ways divided…there was always a good possibility that any given decision would offend someone.”[24]

The Causes of the First Jewish Revolt

Sectarian Tension between Jews and Gentiles – Historians should never view nations as large, happily united groups. The Jews are no exception. There were fierce divisions within their society that separated the population into sects and doctrines that interpreted the Torah differently. The moderate Pharisee Rabbi Chanina said, “Pray for the welfare of the government! For if it were not for the fear of it, men would swallow one another up alive!”[25] And so, not all of the violence in Judea was directed against the Roman occupation. If the Jews could not even cooperate with their brothers, then we can imagine how well they got along with their Gentile neighbors. Sectarian tension was a nagging problem that was inherited, but not created, by the Roman Empire when the it took over Judaea.

The Jews were an exclusive nation, and one cannot despise others without usually receiving something reciprocal, as Oesterley writes, “Jewish exclusiveness had been sowing seeds which were now bringing forth dangerous growths.”[26] The Jews did not consider Galileans to be proper Jews, and they both loathed the Samaritans. The Samaritans claimed to worship the true religion of the ancient Israelites, prior to the Babylonian exile, and they had their own cult and temple in central Palestine. The New Testament provides stories that reveal the antagonism between Jews and Samaritans. For example, when Jesus stopped in Samaria and asked for water from a Samaritan woman, John added “…Jews do not associate with Samaritans.”[27] Fighting was common between the two ethno-religious groups. During the procuratorship of Ventidius Cumanus (48-52 AD), some Jews were murdered while traveling through Samaria. Cumanus turned a blind eye, perhaps because the Samaritans had bribed him. This led to a series of massacres by Jewish Zealots, which was only resolved through police action by Roman troops. The governor of Syria sent Cumanus to Rome to account for his actions. According to Oesterley, the governor’s action depreciated the procuratorship in the eyes of the Jews, “…this weakening of the civil power in Judaea was a contributing cause of the ultimate outbreak of the war.”[28] The governor’s action, although necessary and just, further encouraged lawlessness.

There had long been tension between Jews and Gentiles in communities of mixed populations. The Romans themselves exercised tolerance, but they could not speak for all of their pagan subjects in the east. For example, auxiliaries from the predominantly pagan town of Sebaste were especially anti-Semitic.[29] Riots would periodically break out in cities, most severely in Alexandria and Caesarea. The Roman response to these outbreaks was usually swift and brutal. When Cuspius Fadus came to Palestine in 44 AD, there was a “miniature war” in progress between the Jews of Peraea and the Gentiles of Philadelphia.[30] Agrippa I was a moderate client-king of Rome, but even his death was celebrated by the peoples of Sebaste and Caesarea, and Gentile soldiers violated his daughters.[31]

The Jews and Gentiles of Caesarea had daggers drawn at each other’s throats for years. Some Greeks sacrificed birds in front of a Jewish synagogue in the city in 66 AD. The Roman authorities failed to deal with the situation, which led to an attack on Roman soldiers in Jerusalem. That action in turn resulted in a wave of violence that spread all the way to Alexandria. Gentiles massacred twenty thousand Jews in Caesarea within an hour, and similar atrocities occurred in other cities. The Jews did not stand by idly, but retaliated in kind by slaughtering Gentiles. The failure of Roman and Jewish authorities to control the population contributed to the gradual breakdown of order in Judea, which helped bring on the war in 66 AD.

The Desire for Political Independence – Belonging to the Roman world offered many advantages to the conquered. But in the end, the Romans were still occupiers, and the Jews were loathed, perhaps more than others, to accept foreign domination. Soggin writes, “Rome respected Jewish worship, and did not interfere in it, but all too often this was a purely formal respect…”[32] The Jews were not united, however, in how to best to resist Rome, or whether to resist them at all. Jesus said, “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.”[33] The landowners and high priests benefited from Roman rule and they understood resistance was futile anyway. There were other Jews who thought that some things, like freedom, were worth dying for. An admirable notion, but the Romans thought that some things, like imperium, were worth killing for. Roman hegemony was ultimately based on military supremacy, the foundations on which the Pax Romana rested.

We can trace resentment against Roman rule back to 6 AD, when the Romans created the province. Among the things the Romans first did was conduct a census for taxation.[34] By that point, the Jews clearly understood that they were a conquered people. Josephus calls the Zealots a “fourth sect” of Judaism, and it was founded in opposition to the census.[35] Its founders were Judas of Galilee and Sadduc the Pharisee, who preached Yahweh was the only ruler of Israel and that he would support them if they revolted. Josephus strongly condemns the Zealots and places part of the blame for the war on them.[36]

There were a few slights to Judaism leading up to the revolt that highlighted the realities of the occupation. Roman garrisons were usually stationed inside or nearby cities in the eastern provinces. The procurators would occasionally visit Jerusalem, normally during festivals to prevent seditious activity, such as Passover. Pontius Pilatus (26-36 AD) created an uproar when he visited the Temple Mount and brought his military standards with him, including the imagines. Those particular standards bore the imperial image, and since the emperors were deified, the Jews considered them as idols. After a period of rioting, Pilatus only relented when the Jews threatened martyrdom.[37] Emperor Caligula further outraged Jewish sensibilities by his plans of converting the Temple Mount into a shrine to Jupiter in his image. He went further and demanded statues of himself to be erected in all synagogues as well. The Romans had no great love for Caligula either, and he was assassinated in 41 AD; Caligula’s death probably prevented the Jewish Revolt of 41 AD. The unrest he created, however, did not make the situation any better. Emperor Claudius calmed tension for a time when he appointed his friend Agrippa, a grandson of Herod, as king of Judea in 41 AD. Unfortunately for Romans and Jews, Agrippa’s reign was short.

Roman misrule, in the form of corruption and repression, is often cited as one of the chief causes of the war. Josephus wrote, “…the Roman ministers are injurious to you, and are incurably severe…”[38] Judea was already a troubled and complex province, and the procurators only exacerbated underlying tensions. But it is difficult to determine how the Judean procurators compared with other Roman governors, i.e. in provinces that were not in revolt.[39] There are always two sides to every story. The procurators were not responsible for Rome’s presence in Judea, but they were responsible for maintaining it. To them, Judea was a corner of the empire always causing problems, filled with narrow-minded troublemakers and terrorists. A rock patch of stubborn people with a perverted religion, one that condemned all other deities as false. Moreover, the Jews were so hateful and impertinent they were constantly fighting amongst themselves. The majority of Romans might repeat these prejudices and stereotypes if we could talk to them. The procurators were not men of high character, but it is hard to place all of the blame on them.

Gessius Florus (64-66 AD) was procurator when the revolt broke out. To refer back to the incident in Caesarea, in which the bird was sacrificed in front of a Jewish synagogue, the Jews bribed the procurator to hear their case against the Greeks. Florus refused to hear the case, but he still kept the eight talents and then imprisoned the Jewish petitioners. The Jews were outraged about this, which rendered his next action even more foolish, i.e. the seizure of seventeen talents from the Temple treasury in Jerusalem. Jewish payment of taxes was probably in arrears, resulting from the economic and political turmoil in the region. It was a comparatively small sum, and as procurator, he was within his rights to take the money. Florus’s timing, however, was exceptionally bad. This action provided the spark for the revolt, but the fire had been smoldering long before Florus arrived in Palestine.[40]

Dire Economic Conditions – Rhoads writes in his excellent study of Josephus that religion was pervasive in the Jewish rebel’s thoughts and actions.[41] He concludes, however, that the causes of the war were complex and we cannot single religion out. Rhoads writes, “Our study has shown that there is little evidence for the presence or activity of a Jewish revolutionary sect in the prewar history of 6-44 AD.”[42] The Sicarii were active in the two decades before the war. Their terrorism was generally effective but their support from the populace was insignificant.[43] The Sicarii did not direct the war nor did they participate in the major battles. Josephus, in trying to blame the war on religious militants, was oversimplifying the causes of the war.[44]

The Jews were in an accommodating spirit up until the late forties. Leadership of the country was generally fair, if sometimes vexing. When conflicts arose, Roman and Jewish authorities were able to resolve differences peacefully. Things changed however in the fifties and sixties, when some Jews resorted to more violent methods. This transition was more complicated than the agitation of religious fanatics, as Josephus inaccurately claims. By then revolt had popular support, and it was symptomatic of widespread discontent over the “prevailing social, economic, and political conditions in Palestine.”[45] By that time, Jewish resentment had grown and took on many forms, from petitions to assassinations. The leadership of the country gradually broke down, leading first to chaos in the countryside then in Jerusalem.

Historians do not call the period from 1-200 AD the Pax Romana for nothing. The Roman Empire brought peace and prosperity to the Mediterranean world. For example, the empire made traveling easier, which allowed large numbers of diaspora Jews to conduct pilgrimages to Jerusalem. Nevertheless, although the standard of living usually rose in areas taken over by Rome, the prosperity generated by economic booms was not shared evenly.[46] Judea was no exception, for the Romans supported the local aristocracy as they did virtually everywhere else. We can assume economic disparity existed in Judea before Rome planted her eagles there, but it is unclear how much Rome’s presence intensified these problems.

When Rome acquired new territories urbanization was an essential tool in her efforts of pacification. Not all of the effects were initially positive however, and the Gospels provide indication of economic strain. According to Reed, sympathy for the poor and concern for “debt, land division, and tenancy underlies much of the teachings of Jesus.”[47] The effects of urbanization have been somewhat exaggerated, for peasants gained some benefit by access to new markets, and coinage to pay for taxes.[48] In addition, areas in Palestine that had supported themselves through banditry would have seen, as Goldsworthy writes “no reason to stop doing so with the arrival of Rome…it is possible that in some areas resistance was provoked by the Roman presence.”[49] Soggin writes, “It is difficult to say what are political rebellions and when we have more or less obvious forms of banditry.”[50]

In Judea, the revolts of 66-74 AD and 133-135 AD were highlights of consistent low-level banditry and rebellions in the province.[51] Brigandage unsurprisingly increases when economic hardship increases. These desperate men may have been partly motivated by a hatred of Rome, but the targets of bandits were more often their own people, i.e. not the symbols of Roman authority. The Romans may simply have inherited the unrest in provinces from previous kingdoms and empires. Thus we should not look at the First Jewish Revolt as simply as a national struggle for self-determination. By looking at the economic situation in Judea, we can begin to understand the numerous accounts of brigandage in the literary sources.

In Judea, taxes were especially burdensome. These included the annual tax to Rome, custom and frontier duties, as well as the tax all Jews had to pay to the Temple and the priestly class.[52] Porcius Festus (58-62 AD) managed to wipe out a large number of brigands, but unfortunately his successor did not follow up. Instead, Lucceius Albinus (62-64 AD) increased taxes on the Jews and made matters worse.[53] The lower classes, however, had long been at the mercy of the wealthy. Upper class Jews often bribed Roman officials to secure positions as tax collectors. When a small farmer could not afford to pay his tribute, the authorities would appropriate his land, and many at that point turned to brigandage. In 48 AD, a famine likely initiated or at least intensified banditry. According to Josephus, even the peaceful Essenes carried arms when they traveled abroad.[54]

Oppression by the lay and priestly Jewish aristocracies was the root cause of terrorism in Jerusalem. The high priests used violence to extract tithes from the lower priests.[55] The lay aristocracy, who likewise used oppression to fill their coffers, also assisted in creating disorder in the city.[56] In rural areas, the rich preyed upon the poor so they could pay taxes to Rome. The poor returned the favor through terrorism and brigandage. Rhoads is right to argue, “…the wealthy had the most to lose by a war with Rome, the revolutionary cause was quite popular among the lower classes…”[57] Thus for the poor the war was not only a national revolt against Roman rule, but also an opportunity to wage class warfare. Highwaymen flourished in these conditions. Rhoads also mentions the completion of the Temple in the mid-sixties as exacerbated worsening economic conditions, as some 18,000 workers were now without jobs.[58] Finding a job in ancient times is not like finding a job now. Landless people were often in a bind as they were dependent on public works projects initiated by their government.

The Zealots and Sicarii at times egged on the rest of the population, but the majority of Jews did not oppose their efforts by the late sixties. In the years leading up to the revolt Maukay writes, “…there was apparently an upsurge in expectations of the imminent arrival of the messiah, and several prophets attempted to lead the masses in revolt against the Romans…”[59] These false prophets would not have been so popular with the masses unless there had been good reason to support them. One of them was Theudas, who promised his followers he could make the Jordan River part. Cuspius Fadus (44-46 AD) prevented Theudas from attempting that feat by capturing him and decapitating him.[60] By the time of Theudas, the masses were longing for anyone to lead them to salvation.

Conclusion – The First Jewish Revolt was a complex conflict with no single cause. I have identified three main causes that interacted with each other to produce the war: sectarian tension between Jews and Gentiles, Jewish desire for political independence, and dire economic conditions in Judea. Of those three, the last one is probably the most significant. If all of the inhabitants of Judea were economically content in 66 AD, then there may not have been a revolt. The occasional slight towards Judaism may not have been sufficient to stir up the Jews for a suicidal war against the might of Rome. The war did not result from misunderstanding between the Jews and Romans, for the Judean lower classes knew precisely who their enemies were. Nevertheless, it is probable every province in the empire had its economic problems, and yet they were not all in revolt. Thus, religion must have played a factor in the persistence of Rome’s Jewish problem, which also includes Jewish tensions with their Gentile and Samaritan neighbors. All of these causes were intertwined to bring about the catastrophic war in 66 AD, which in the end, only succeeded in more firmly rooting Roman imperium in southwest Asia.[61]

Choi, A. “The Travelling Peasant and Urban-Rural relations in Roman Galilee.” Travel and Religion in Antiquity Seminar, Canadian Society of Biblical Studies, University of Western Ontario, London, May 2005.

[37] F. Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews in The Works of Josephus, (United States: Hendrickson Publishers, 1987), 18.60ff. F. Josephus, The Jewish War in The Works of Josephus, (United States: Hendrickson Publishers, 1987), 2.175ff.

[38] F. Josephus, The Jewish War in The Works of Josephus, (United States: Hendrickson Publishers, 1987), 2.16.352.